Gun-control official on Senate failure: “Bribery isn’t what it once was”

posted at 2:01 pm on April 18, 2013 by Allahpundit

Give this guy credit, at least, for not mincing words. In a more prosperous age, billions of dollars in pork would have been flung at the Senate’s gun-control fencesitters to buy their votes yesterday. It took an endlessly sputtering economy, $16 trillion in debt, and an entitlement crisis so frightening that even Obama’s now proposing (exceedingly mild) Social Security reform to starve the beast, if only for one day. Cut Congress’s pursestrings and good things can happen. Who knew?

The gun control groups central to Obama’s push never lost faith in the White House and praised its efforts even as it was clear the push would fail.

“Bribery isn’t what it once was,” said an official with one of the major gun-control groups. “The government has no money. Once upon a time you would throw somebody a post office or a research facility in times like this. Frankly, there’s not a lot of leverage.”

Couldn’t Mike Bloomberg have offered to build a $500 million bridge in Alaska for Begich or something? Maybe that’s the next step in the big counter-NRA campaign.

Don’t celebrate too much, though: A good outcome here could mean a bad one elsewhere.

In the end, however, moderates and conservatives in the upper chamber said they simply couldn’t deal with a flurry of progressive issues at once — from gay marriage to immigration to guns…

One senator told a White House official that it was “Guns, gays and immigration – it’s too much. I can be with you on one or two of them, but not all three.”…

But privately, administration officials were looking ahead to the far more sanguine prospects of negotiating a bipartisan immigration reform bill — and expressed hope that clearing the decks on guns would raise prospects for a faster agreement.

Yeah, now that red-state Democrats and purple-state Republicans have shown conservatives back home that they’re willing to go to the mat for gun rights, they need something to show centrists how pragmatic and moderate they are. Immigration’s the obvious choice. Mickey Kaus has been worried about that for months, writing during the Hagel hearings that he hoped the GOP lost on that one so that they’d dig in and fight to win against amnesty. Of course, they did end up losing on Hagel — but now they’ve just won very big on guns, with Obama and his gun-control lackeys promising to make a colossal stink about it into next year. If you’re Mark Pryor, how much do you resist the Gang of Eight bill under those circumstances? The Democratic leadership is annoyed at you for your gun votes so you’re looking to make amends; you’ve got cover from conservative heartthrob Marco Rubio to vote yes on immigration, which may end up being the signature achievement of O’s second term, so there you go. The immigration battles of the last decade were characterized by defectors on both sides but, thanks to gun control, those conditions may no longer obtain. Democratic squishes may fold, leaving only the most conservative factions of the House and Senate to fend the bill off. McConnell might be prepared to resist at all costs because he’s terrified of a primary challenge in Kentucky, but is Boehner? With so much of the Republican intelligentsia screaming at him to throw Latinos a bone so that we can boost our take of their vote in the next election to 31 or 32 percent or whatever? Dude, I’m nervous.

Also, I’m not as confident as Ed that they won’t take one last stab at background checks later this year or early next, if/when they’re done with immigration. (Schumer predicted this weekend that immigration would be finished within eight weeks.) It all depends on how much heat the Senate’s squishes take from anti-gun groups. If Bloomberg starts spending heavily in their Senate races to make an example of them and if Toomey/Manchin can be watered down a bit to let the squishes save face in flipping their votes to yes, then why not give it another shot? Reid voted no on the bill yesterday, in fact, for the express purpose of preserving his ability to reintroduce it later. Ironically, the immigration debate may help determine whether gun control gets a second chance just as gun control momentarily might have helped determine the odds of passing immigration reform. If the pushback against Rubio’s bill from the right is more intense than expected, the Pryors and Begiches of the world may decide they have no choice but to vote no on that too. In that case, they’ll be stuck looking for a way to placate liberals, who’ll now be doubly disappointed. A weakened bill on background checks could do the trick. Unlikely, but possible.

Update: Dude?

Just chatted w Steve King. He said they don’t currently have enough votes to stop an immigration bill in the House.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

ot: reading twitchy, it sounds like the service in boston was another campaign rally….
did anyone watch?

cmsinaz on April 18, 2013 at 2:06 PM

I read the transcript. A good deal of the tribute to the victims was all about the time he and Mooch spent in Boston. The rest was platitudes that could have been written by a high school senior. No soaring rhetoric of Reagan. No heartfelt details about the dead. It was like one of those memorial services you go to where it is clear the pastor has never met the deceased.

“Bribery isn’t what it once was,” said an official with one of the major gun-control groups. “The government has no money. Once upon a time you would throw somebody a post office or a research facility in times like this. Frankly, there’s not a lot of leverage.”

Although the warm fuzzy feeling I got knowing that most GOP senators voted no yesterday I fear our GOP congressmen will go all spongy and give Barry this bone so he doesn’t growl at them. Good dog, here is a biscuit.

Although the warm fuzzy feeling I got knowing that most GOP senators voted no yesterday I fear our GOP congressmen will go all spongy and give Barry this bone so he doesn’t growl at them. Good dog, here is a biscuit.

Just chatted w Steve King. He said they don’t currently have enough votes to stop an immigration bill in the House.

Nope, but they do have enough votes to add additional amendments to the bill (such as capping the number of illegals, making the “triggers stricter,etc.) that would make the bill very unattractive to Democrats.

One senator told a White House official that it was “Guns, gays and immigration – it’s too much. I can be with you on one or two of them, but not all three.”…

Sigh, as if I needed further confirmation that the RINOs deserve their name and may as well fess up to being Dem-lite. Of course, what they should do following a victory on gun control, is keep pushing while Obama is petulantly on his heels and make him lose again. But no, can’t have that, have to be nice to Obama and betray the American people instead.

heh
Why does this remind me of that old joke: what’s the difference between a politician and a corrupt politician? A politician is a person who can be bought. A corrupt politician is a politician who doesn’t stay bought.

Just chatted w Steve King. He said they don’t currently have enough votes to stop an immigration bill in the House.

THIS is why I hate Boehner. He sees Harry Reid keeping votes from coming to the floor, but wants to continue playing tiddlywinks while the Dems are playing dirty.

I’d tell Obama and Reid to go pound sand and let them demagogue me to death on amnesty and anti-second amendment issues. I win with the voters when I tell them American citizenship still has value and your natural rights are precious. I’ll take that side of the argument any day of the week.

As someone on another thread said, this bill is does less than the previous, even though the 1986 amnesty called for all the EXACT SAME THINGS they are calling for now!

E-Verify-
Title I: Control of Illegal Immigration – Part A: Employment

Establishes an employment verification system. Requires: (1) the employer to attest, on a form developed by the Attorney General, that the employee’s work status has been verified by examination of a passport, birth certificate, social security card, alien documentation papers, or other proof; (2) the worker to similarly attest that he or she is a U.S. citizen or national, or authorized alien; and (3) the employer to keep such records for three years in the case of referral or recruitment, or the later of three years or one year after employment termination in the case of hiring.

More Border Agents-
Part B: Improvement of Enforcement and Services

States that essential elements of the immigration control and reform program established by this Act are increased enforcement and administrative activities of the Border Patrol, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and other appropriate Federal agencies.

Amnesty-
Title II: Legalization

Directs the Attorney General to adjust to temporary resident status those aliens who: (1) apply within 18 months; (2) establish that they entered the United States before January 1, 1982, and have resided here continuously in an unlawful status (including Cuban/Haitian entrants) since such date; and (3) are otherwise admissible.

Authorizes similar status adjustment for specified aliens who entered legally as nonimmigrants but whose period of authorized stay ended before January 1, 1982. (States that in the case of exchange visitors the two-year foreign residence requirement must have been met or waived.)

Prohibits the legalization of persons: (1) convicted of a felony or three or more misdemeanors in the United States; or (2) who have taken part in political, religious, or racial persecution. Requires an alien applying for temporary resident status to register under the Military Selective Service Act, if such Act so requires.

Requires an employer H-2A visa petition to certify that: (1) there are not enough local U.S. workers for the job; and (2) similarly employed U.S. workers’ wages and working conditions will not be adversely affected.

Oh, bribery is still what it always was. But thanks to inflation the price has gone up just a tad.

To just pick an example totally at random, I wonder what the going rate is for hustling a member of the House of Saud who may, or may not be, a person of interest in a terrorist attack out of the country?

On these issues the one thing I would like is for the GOP to take more of a leadership role in the discussion. It’s clear we have issues with illegal immigration; instead of reacting to the Go8, Boehner and Co. should be putting out their own proposal that meets with conservative GOP ideas.

it was more inspiring than the Gettysburg F*ing Address!! he said “you will run again”. tell me that don’t send a chill down your spine!! your grandchildren will be memorizing this speech to recite in civics class

‘As a long-time gun owner, I believe the right to keep and bear arms should not be dependent on the city in which you live. The provisions of the U.S. Constitution apply to all Americans, regardless of geography……As a gun owner, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. In February, I was proud to sign the Amicus Brief in District of Columbia v Heller asking the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court ruling that overturned the long standing DC gun ban. We have a long tradition of gun ownership in the United States. … It is a tradition which every law-abiding citizen should be able to enjoy.’

– Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, September 2008

I feel for Ms Giffords because of what happened to her, but you cannot be a true supporter of the Second Amendment if your support ‘evolves’ because of how it affects you personally.

When Ron Portman ‘evolved’ on SSM, the Left – including many of the usual suspects here – called him a hypocrite because he only came to support gay marriage once he learned of his own son’s homosexuality. It didn’t matter that Portman’s ‘evolution’ was similar to Obama’s ‘Revolution‘ on the issue.

Their argument was: Your personal experience should have no effect on the constitutional and civil rights of others.

They have a point…although they selectively make it. Nevertheless, if Ron Portman’s ‘evolution’ is merely an example of his hypocrisy, can’t the same be true of Gabby Giffords ‘evolution’ on the Second Amendment?

He claims that this amnesty bill is NOT an amnesty bill, that it is “tough” on illegal aliens. So, why do it? Allah and Kaus have clearly demonstrated that this is amnesty first, and border security…probably never.

So if he’s so concerned with the plight of those in the shadows, but “tough tough tough” on illegal immigration, what is he going to do with the millions who have come in the last year, whom he says will “never” be eligible for citizenship, or the millions who will come in the next 10 years.

He claims that this amnesty bill is NOT an amnesty bill, that it is “tough” on illegal aliens. So, why do it? Allah and Kaus have clearly demonstrated that this is amnesty first, and border security…probably never.

So if he’s so concerned with the plight of those in the shadows, but “tough tough tough” on illegal immigration, what is he going to do with the millions who have come in the last year, whom he says will “never” be eligible for citizenship, or the millions who will come in the next 10 years.

Bullship. He’ll be back to do this again in 10 years.

Jaibones on April 18, 2013 at 5:16 PM

On Rush’s show today, Rubio made the ridiculous statement that “amnesty is the status quo”, and his alternative is not amnesty.